social sciences

· majority having greater numbers; minority having fewer numbers

· NOT in this class, instead whether a person / group is considered minority or majority is based on their relationship to power, resources, authority, privilege

— minority (subordinate) – reduced access to power, resources, authority, privilege

— majority (dominant/core) – greater access to power, resources, authority, privilege

— — benefit when things remain the same

does NOT indicate what should be, but the reality of the relationship between minority / majority (dominant) groups

the book we are using has 2 continuing themes, which will be explained in more detail later

1. how subsistence technology impacts the relationship between majority and minority

- subsistence technology: how a society provides for the basic needs (food, water, shelter) for the people

2. contact situation between majority and minority: considers the initial contact between majority and minority according to two perspectives: Noel / Blauner

· Noel: whether or not the following conditions were in place at time of contact: ethnocentrism, competition, power differential among the groups

· Blauner: whether the initial contact was immigration or colonization

for the past 3 decades (as compared to mid 1900s): more immigrants coming into US and these immigrants have been coming from more diverse areas

· regardless of how people in the US feel about these immigrants, we must remember that (aside from Native Americans) we are a nation of immigrants

race – perceived physical differences

ethnicity – perceived cultural differences

where this class differs from the text book

· text refers to everyone, including Native Americans as immigrants

· however, many Native American groups do not see themselves as immigrants; in fact some refer to selves as ‘First Peoples’ or ‘First Nations”

· referencing Native Americans as immigrants considers the understanding that individuals came from

Asia into the Americas through the Bering Strait many thousands of years ago

· today, archeologists are finding evidence of human inhabitation in the Americas much earlier than previously thought

— this cannot be considered immigration since it is so many thousands of years ago

· by not identifying Native Americans as immigrants, we are respecting their perception of themselves — respect for others (including how individuals / groups refer to themselves) will be an important part of this class

hierarchy and inequality: simply noting differences among groups is not problematic - perceived differences between groups is not problematic until there is an implied status hierarchy (that is, differences in how goods, services, power are distributed)

· the terms on this graph are labels

· they are arbitrary, do not have clear boundaries

· used here because these are the terms / labels used in the US census

· by using labels, we are putting all persons of ‘x’ group together

— however, individuals within any of these categories will be different from one another

· problem with these labels: more categories are likely to be added; does not acknowledge people that are from more than one category

unequal distribution of goods, services, power creates inequalities

· diversity in US today is not limited to ethnicity, race – other factors include social class (SES or socio-economic status), education, size of group, religion, language, sexual orientation, differences in physical abilities …

‘markers’ of group membership as a minority group

1. inequality: experience a pattern of disadvantage, inequality

- degree of disadvantage can vary (genocide, slavery to no left hand desks)

2. visibility: group members share a trait / characteristic that can be observed; that differentiates them as unique (language, dress, grooming, physical characteristics, religion, etc.)

· these differences are considered to be evidence that the group is inferior

· these traits allow group members to be identified & treated as inferior

· these various characteristics have no innate meaning

ethnic / racial minority groups

· ethnic minority groups: defined primarily due to cultural differences

· racial minority groups: defined primarily due to physical differences - ethnic and racial groups overlap

racial and ethnic groups are social constructs (society determines what the groups are, where the boundaries are, what the hierarchies are) - therefore the consequences are social

· categories of race and ethnicity exist not due to any biological aspect, but due to historical, social, economic, political processes

· social consequences can include: where to live, type and degree of education, employment, etc. — impact: exposure to pollution, available diet (nutritious or not), neighborhood safety (can kids play outside without fear of violence or environmental problems?)

racial minority groups - defined as minority according to perceived physical characteristics

· categories change over time, and from place to place

· no scientific proof of what the categories are or what criteria should be used to put a person in one category or another

· yes, genetic differences can be noticed; however, they are not proof of racial heritage

3. awareness: group members identify as a group; are a self-conscious social unit

- a sense of group identity emerges creating a degree of solidarity (we are all in this together) - can also mean that people in different groups have world views different from others

4. ascription: ascribed membership (a person‘s status is given at birth)

· ascribed characteristics tend to be permanent - not changeable

· achieved characteristics – gained through an effort

— today our society emphasizes a person’s achieved characteristics; we determine a person or a group’s status in society based on what we think they have achieved

— however, we also need to recognize that what a person achieves will dependent on what choices s/he has been given

— a person’s ascribed membership impacts the choices set before them; life choices are broadened or narrowed according to things such as: neighborhood a child grows up in; school district (US schools are not equitable); parents’ relationship to the means of production (economic status); parents’ educational attainment, etc.

5. intimate relationships: tendency to marry within group (endogamous)

· sometimes voluntary by minority group; sometimes enforced by dominant group

· other intimate relationships (friends) are also likely to be within group

· prior to 1967 many states in the US had laws forbidding 2 people of different races from marrying

traits above set boundaries of who is or who is not part of which groups

· these are ‘markers’ of group membership - these visible signs allow quick and easy identification - and differential treatment

· these traits / characteristics themselves not significant - become significant through social construction process

· pattern of inequality - part of daily life - not really acknowledged as existing by those in majority, dominant groups because they do not experience the negative effects

inequality: most important characteristic of minority groups (reduced access to resources (something most people want, but there is not enough to go around), power, authority, privilege) - includes patterns of inequality, exploitation, slavery, genocide

· these patterns emerge due to majority

(dominant) group’s actions

· frequently the inequalities are not recognized by members of majority, dominant group (they simply don’t ‘see’ it – because they haven’t experienced it)

stratification exists in US, though we like to think it doesn’t

· results in social classes (SES: socioeconomic status)

stratification - unequal distribution of valued goods, services, power - stratification is basic to almost all human societies (some make exception for hunting / gathering societies)

— theme – subsistence technology – how a society provides what the individuals need, such as food, shelter water

· strata: horizontal layers - social classes - differ re: resources, education, age, gender, talent

· degree of access to resources, power, authority important

depending on a person’s racial status, their perceptions of racism can be very different

Theoretical Perspectives: different theoretical perspectives (ways of understanding) inequality

· no one theoretical perspective can explain all problems

· these are looked at in chronological order

· not mutually exclusive

Marx

· Marxism - complex theory - core concern is societal inequality

— inequality due a society‘s system of economic production

— ‘means of production’ important to understanding inequality (that is the most important institution in a society is the economy)

— a person’s status is based on what that person’s relationship is to the means of production (do they own the means of production, or do they sell their labor for subsistence wages)

— — means of production (materials, tools, resources, organizations a society uses to produce, distribute (usually unequally) goods & services)

Marx saw 2 and only 2 classes

· proletariat (working class) - sold their labor for subsistence wages (to only get laborers and families from day to day, year to year, generation to generation) - bourgeoisie (elite) - owned the means of production

— the system of means of production can / does change

· this system creates inequality, which leads to competition, which leads to conflict

· Marx perceived conflict as good since it can bring about needed social change

— eventually this conflict would result in working class overcoming exploitation with a new, utopian, egalitarian society emerging

Marx did not see emergence of middle class

· today we are losing our middle class - most people are in downward social mobility

— lower classes are increasing in numbers, upper classes decreasing in numbers, but increasing in resources

means of production changes over time; below are different subsistence technologies and what’s important for that period)

· agriculture period land is important

· industrial period factories, machines - capital

· post-industrial – knowledge, ability to use knowledge

Weber - came after Marx

· felt that Marx's view of inequality (primarily economics) was too narrow

· in addition to considering SES (socio-economic status; in Marx’s terms the economy)

need to also consider, prestige, power (ability to influence others - INCLUDING DECISION MAKING

– example political power through voting)

— above 3 often go together - but not always - that is, someone can be high in SES (a person who has accumulated wealth in organized crime), but not have the prestige that a person of the same SES whose SES was acquired through more accepted means)

— — note: accepted means does not always mean appropriate, good for all members of society, etc. (ex: current financial - banking, investment community); accepted means refers to what a society allows for

Weber: 3 different, often overlapping stratification systems

1. ownership, control of property, wealth, income (similar to Marx concept of class)

2. prestige: honor, esteem, respect

3. power (including decision making) - ability to influence others, pursue own interests, goals

distinction of income and wealth

· income – amount earned within a set period of time; usually 1 year)

· wealth – accumulated over time – one person’s lifetime or through generations of a family

— wealth has a greater impact; can help us and others in a downturn; income tends to be unstable

Lenski (after Weber) - accepts Weber‘s premise of importance of class (property), prestige, power

· includes that to understand stratification, we need to consider societal evolution (level of development)

· nature of inequality related to subsistence technology - how a society satisfies basic needs (food, water, shelter)

— subsistence technology impacts degree of inequality & criteria of inequality)

hunting / gathering // foraging – little surplus, little to no stratification – human energy only

agricultural societies rely on human & animal labor to create the energy to sustain life - this inequality based on control of land, labor (are most important components to means of production)

industrial society - land ownership not as important as in pre-industrial; ownership of manufacturing, commercial interests are important

· control of capital is now important; the nature of inequality will also be different

post industrial society - societies‘ economic growth based on technology, computer related knowledge, information processing, scientific research

· therefore specialized knowledge, new techniques, education important now

· post industrial stratification not based just on land or capital, education is also crucial

— and education (including probability of an adequate education) is unequally distributed

Patricia Hill Collins: adds concept of intersectionality (female, black)

· intersection of race, class, gender (not look at them separately but recognize they are): — interlocked

— mutually reinforcing

inequalities need to be examined in more complexity - not just not dichotomy of 2 classes (elite versus workers) - within the many class strata, individuals are then situated according to the combination of race, class, gender - for that specific person

being white (or black, or Asian, etc.) is not the same experience for all persons who appear to be of that group

· important to consider where that person fits into society by also examining that person‘s class, gender - within the current social context

the above is a ‘matrix of domination’- that is, there are many cross systems of domination and subordination

· cross over each other

· overlap with each other

· impact an individual person‘s experiences, opportunities

· the concept ‘matrix of domination’ does not end with race, class, gender

— other factors such as disability, sexual preference, religion, age, national origin, being homeless

how individuals are ranked to each other re: power is not static

· a man working at a low income, low prestige job will have low power at work

· when that same man goes home, his power is likely to increase, especially if the household is based on more patriarchal principles

difference between minority group and majority group is not based on numbers, but on relationship to power

minority group status & stratification

minority status

· stratification due to differential access to wealth, income, power, authority, privilege - a person‘s status (minority or majority) impacts that person‘s life chances, health, wealth opportunities, potential success

social classes / minority group status - often correlated, not always

· some groups are more able to not be as constrained by minority status (example a Euro-ethnic white may be low income, but if they are not also considered minority status due to perceived race, they are likely to have more opportunities than a person in a similar niche who is also African

American, Hispanic American or Native American)

· somewhat together, not 100%

· differences in power leads to competition, conflict - to control goods, services

— can result in emergence of exploitation institutions such as slavery

· social classes may be correlated with a group’s place in the strata; however these are separate social realities

at core of struggles between dominant / majority groups and minority / subordinate groups are inequalities of property, wealth, prestige, and power

race

· even though race is not regarded as an important biological characteristic, it is still an important social concept since it used to differentiate among people

· and, as a social construct, the consequences of race are social (where to live, type of employment, educational attainment, access to appropriate nutrition, neighborhood safety, etc.)

dominant-minority group relationships due to desire to control valued resources (goods & services including land, labor, education, etc.)

visible traits used to define boundaries across groups - if traits are more easily noted, the identification is more certain (increases ability to itemize people into groups)

· boundary - race, religion, language, occupation

· important: these categories are not perceived as simple ‘different- - hierarchy is imbedded

history of evolution

· current scientific data points to the beginnings of human kind in Africa, then dispersing throughout the globe

— melanin (protects our skin from sun) is more prevalent in people that live closer to the equator — over thousands of years, as peoples move northward and then east and west, melanin no longer needed to protect from sun

— in fact, the farther from the equator, melanin is counter productive because it can reduce our ability to produce vitamin D

1400s - technology of ship building and navigation improves, allowing Europeans to explore and then colonize / exploit other areas

· as exploration, colonization increase, the importance of race increases

— when areas are colonized, the peoples in those areas are considered inferior (it helps to justify exploitation)

· racism used to justify military conquest, genocide, exploitation, slavery

using biology to ‘explain’ race

· the ‘categories’ developed are arbitrary, blurred, ambiguous

· often more variation within a category than across different categories

social construction of race

· race played role in creating institution of slavery in what became the US

· rather than science, meaning of race due to historical, social, economic, political processes

· racial differences re: slavery - emerged so that elite can justify exploitation of slaves

· importance of race was a social construction - so current consequences are social

prejudice

· negative attitudes (cognition, thoughts) applied to an entire category of people

· these attitudes are usually very invested in affect (the emotions), so can be hard to ‘un-do’ — that is, negative emotions (affect) are generally attached to groups that are defined as being inferior

discrimination – actions, behaviors; treating people differently; sometimes based on prejudices

stereotypes are generalizations that are thought to apply to all members of a group

· competition between groups likely leads to prejudice (rather than prejudice leading to competition)

· prejudice serves the purpose of rationalizing inequities in societies (if X group is inferior, then it is

‘OK’ to exploit them)

— over time this societal inequality becomes part of the cultural heritage of a society

gender

· both gender and race have biological and social components

· both can be very visible and convenient means of sorting and judging people

· need to look at gender not just – male / female, but also how individuals have various life opportunities, experiences based on gender, class and race

this approach permits us to analyze the ways in which race, ethnicity, gender, and class combine, overlap, and crosscut each other to form a “matrix of domination” (Hill-Collins).

discrimination and prejudice often go together, but not always

· some very prejudiced people don’t act on their thoughts (may want to be politically correct) - or some non-prejudiced people may discriminate (better to treat ‘others’ poorly than to be the scapegoat yourself)

ideological racism – a belief system or a set of ideas

· asserts that a particular group is inferior

· is used to legitimize or rationalize the inferior status of the group

· incorporated into the culture of society and can be passed on from generation to generation.

institutionalized discrimination

· patterns of unequal treatment based on group membership and built into the institutions and daily operations of society

· can be obvious and overt, but usually operate in more hidden and unintended ways

· individual level prejudice and discrimination, and group level racism and institutional discrimination reinforce each other

some thoughts on causes of prejudice

· being raised in a racist society (with an underlying acceptance of prejudice and discrimination)

· prejudice emerges from intergroup conflict

· competition between groups can lead to prejudice

— more likely that prejudice is a result of competition (rather than prejudice being a cause of competition)

· though prejudice may originate due to competition, it often continues as an underlying basis of society well past original competition

other reasons for prejudice

· it is learned through the processes of socialization; sometimes learned from family; sometimes learned through other agencies of socialization (example: peers, school) - what we learn ‘to be true’ through socialization is often difficult to change

· since prejudice is learned, it can be ‘unlearned’ that it is passed from generation to generation

self-fulfilling cycle of prejudice

though the origins of prejudice are group competition, it often continues long after

Myrdal proposed

· with greater power, dominant group forces minority group into an inferior status (example: slavery)

· to both create and justify racial stratification, dominant group invents, accepts prejudice

· dominant group observes that members of the minority group are, indeed, in an inferior status (low income, inadequate education, poor living conditions); this reinforces idea that group members are inferior

· prejudice / racism help justify discrimination

social distance scales

social distance: related to prejudice, not quite the same

· suggests 7 degrees of social distance

1. to close kin by marriage

2. to my club as personal chum

3. to my street as neighbors

4. to employment in my occupation

5. to citizenship in my country

6. as visitors only to my country

7. would exclude from my country